On November 30, the Washington Secretary of State said the Libertarian Party is not a ballot-qualified party, even though 5% for president gains that status and even though her web page says Gary Johnson got 5.01%. Even though the Washington Secretary of State has not reported any presidential write-ins since 1992, or even acknowledged the existence of any presidential write-ins since 1992, now she says the write-ins (the number of which she has not revealed) will pull Johnson’s percentage below 5%.
It is likely the Libertarian Party will sue, because the presidential write-ins are not valid, because they are not in support of any particular slate of candidates for presidential elector. The party may also ask the legislature to lower the vote test. The median vote test of the 50 states is 2%.
What is the current problems with the National Libertarian party and the neighboring Oregon Libertarian party.I heard or seen they were disaffiliated.
Richard, Does the Libertarian Party support keeping or scrapping the Electoral College? If either their National leadership or Gary Johnson has ever made any statements in opposition, the chances of any lawsuit success on this will be slim, IMO.
Moving the goalposts, as usual.
@ Jeff Becker, I don’t believe that many if any of the LNC would support scrapping the EC, at least not without a Constitutional Amendment. The EC works slightly in favor of smaller states and smaller parties by making it possible for a third party to win or be competitive in some states when winning the National Vote would be next to impossible, (George Wallace in 1968 being the most recent that comes to mind). This usually pushes one or both of the sclerotic parties in the philosophical direction of the smaller party to attract votes.
@Walt Ziobro, Bingo!
Thanks for this reporting. The misuse of of write-ins is a tactical that exposes for all that care that the major parties are transparent in their disingenuous acts to limit choices for voters. I’ll follow this in courts to see the arguments.
@ Jeff Becker:
I don’t recall that the LP has ever taken an official stand regarding the electoral college. As Stuart Simms pointed out, I think that the LP accepts the electoral college as a given, and tries to use it to tactical advantage. The big hope this year was that Gary Johnson might carry his home state and have an impact on the electoral college, but that was not to be.
Its clear that write-ins are invalid in the state of washington (unless you are the winner). I have grown to like Wyman, but I cant believe she is unable to realize this. Hopefull the LP can convince her without suing, if not then sue.
If he had been included in the debates he could have at least carried his home state, possibly three more thus keeping anyone from from 270 electoral votes. Ballot access now assured in 38 states thus saving millions. A third party we now have.
The LP would consider measured voting as proposed in Maine and currently used on parts of Europe. If this had been in place here Gary Johnson might be President and 3 seats in the Senate and 14 in Congress. A more representational form of government for sure.
Staurt Simms; yes parties do sometimes copy the platforms of potential rival parties. As the Democrats did in the 1920’s when they adopted some of the platforms of the Socialist Workers Party. As self avowed progressives they were mostly socialists anyway. That’s why Mussolini favored an alliance with Roosevelt. A man he deeply admired. Hitler prefered an alliance with socialist Great Britain which had begun to distance itself from socialist policy’s as Hitler began rising to power. History is a fickle thing is it not?
Sue for $$$$$ DAMAGES to bankrupt ALL banana republic robot party hacks with their LAWLESS machinations.
Wyman is cheating the Washington LP
https://medium.com/@Chris_Powell/kim-wyman-is-cheating-the-washington-libertarian-party-9216da731874#.6hzr9n6ff
@William, there is no issue between the LPO and the National LP. There is a group of conservatives who claim to be the legitimate LPO and have repeatedly been ruled that they aren’t the group that has access to the LP ballot line in Oregon is. There are lots of other details that you can find on IPR if you are interested, but that’s the main thing.
It sounds like the (Democrat) SOS is looking for a way to bend the rules to deny the Libertarians their place on the ballot.
Can you provide a link to any communication by Kim Wyman or the SOS Office, Elections Division that the Libertarian Party is not a major party?
The SOS reported these preliminary write-in results.
https://wei.sos.wa.gov/agency/osos/en/press_and_research/PreviousElections/2016/General-Election/Data/Documents/Total%20Writeins%20by%20County.xlsx
Clark, Cowlitz, King, Kitsap, Pierce, San Juan, Snohomish, Spokane, Thurston, and Yakima counties certified the number of write-in votes for president. They collectively represent 79% of the initial reported write-ins. Their certified total of write-ins is 84,208, which is 22,204 more than the initial report (35.8% increase). If we simply add 22,204 to the statewide initial total, that would represent 100,419 write-ins. If we project the 35.8% for the remaining counties, this would represent 106,224 write-ins.
If we go with the 100,419 minimum number, then Johnson received 4.86% of valid presidential votes.
The SOS web site provides links to the county auditors election websites. For many counties, they also host the auditor website. While King and other large counties have the IT departments for a web site, it may be difficult if not impossible for smaller counties to even update a MySpace Account, let alone to transition to FaceBook. Garfield only has 2500 residents.
The SOS also provides a template for reporting election results. Each county apparently gets to choose the color scheme. These are hosted on the SOS website. Unfortunate these templates do not have a place for indicating the number of write-in, overvotes, and undervotes.
They are not the official results, since they are not the certified results, which require reporting of write-in, overvotes, and undervotes.
Here is guidance to the auditors as to what constitutes a valid vote:
https://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/Statewide-Standards-on-What-is-a-Vote.pdf
Washington would be better off:
(1) Removing the constitutional provisions for filling vacancies, and going back to 1890 language.
(2) If they feel a need for quick filling of vacancies while the legislature is in session, they could have a citizens commission for each district. At the general election, select 10 voters at random, and ask if they would be willing to serve on a vacancy committee. At the time of a vacancy, pick one from each precinct and convene a meeting and pick a temporary replacement.
(3) But Washington holds special elections to fill vacancies in Congress, there is no reason that they can not do the same for the legislature, and there is no reason to wait for the fall. With all-mail elections, they don’t need to arrange polling sites. Prepare the ballots, mail them out, and count them when they are returned.
(4) Without the need for elected Precinct Committee Officers, they can be removed from the Top 2 primary ballot. Thus one reason for having “major parties” is eliminated.
(5) Let any party that had a presidential nominee in the previous election participate in the presidential primary. A party is a full participant if they use the results of the primary to:
(a) Choose their nominee (direct nomination);
(b) Choose most (3/4?) of the party’s delegates to a national convention;
A party is a partial participant if presidential candidates appears on the primary ballot, but neither (a) or (b) applies. The party is free to regard or disregard the results as they choose. A party is a non-participant if no candidates appear on the primary ballots. Independent candidates may also appear on the primary ballot.
Any voter may vote for any candidate.
Full participant parties may requires voters for their candidates to sign a public pledge, and only count votes from those who have pledged to the party. Full participant parties will receive lists of the voters who made the pledge.
A full participant party that receives sufficient votes in the primary qualifies their nominee for the general election ballot. The party designates the presidential and vice-presidential candidate, and presidential electors.
A new party, partial participant party, or non-participant party may nominate by convention(s) just as now for minor parties. The party designates the presidential and vice-presidential candidate, and presidential electors.
Any candidate who receives sufficient votes may apply for a place on the general election ballot as an independent candidate, and designate their vice-presidential candidate, and elector candidates. Sore loser laws do not apply. Independent candidates may also qualify by petition.
Write-in candidates may declare their candidacy, and designate their vice-presidential and presidential elector candidates.
If an undeclared write-in candidate receives the most votes for president, he may designate his presidential electors. If he fails to do so, no electors will be appointed in Washington.
Thus there will be no need to have major parties.
The state might recognize political parties to the extent needed, and require the parties to designate state and county executive bodies, and require submission of party rules, responsible financial reporting, and a state convention every two years, with a quorum of 100 persons required.
Who are these Oregon Libertarians promoting or recruiting Anthony Ince.For the Libertarian party Presidential nomination in 2020.I seen it on a Facebook page.And there was a boycott by Oregon Libertarians to attend the 2016 convention.Anthony lives in Springfield Missouri.
William Sollenberger… That is a group of rogue individuals using the Libertarian Party name as a PAC (as the state of Oregon considers them to be), and they’re trying to act as the legitimate Libertarian Party. They’ve continually tried to hold meetings as the LP state affiliate in Oregon and have submitted candidate lists to the Secretary of State in Oregon to have their hand picked candidates on the ballot instead of the actual LP Oregon’s candidates. The Secretary of State ALWAYS rejects the PAC’s submission.
Here’s a recent exchange from this group to the SOS of Oregon:
http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/09/burke-writes-to-the-oregon-secretary-of-state-tries-to-replace-the-libertarian-party-of-oregons-candidates/